MrClinton

A higher standard for teachers is understandable but to ostracize a rather minor offense just because the offender is a teacher is unfair. In the end this case will be lowered to a misdemeanor or dropped altogether so is the walk of shame even necessary. This article serves one purpose and that is to humiliate a public servant.

After a quick search of the Springfield Police arrest log, I've counted 32 separate arrests for assault and battery on a police officer. Can someone tell me what was so interesting about Mr. Motley that he gets an article (with a mugshot included) on the coveted Masslive.com website.

Why this, why now? This is a million dollar question but the answer is simply a million dollar one; "The City of Springfield, mainly the mayor's office, is putting itself in the best possible position to win the bid for the Western Massachusetts casino project." The whole story about curbing the violence is all a smoke screen because regardless of whether a bar closes at one or two the patrons will still remain the same. Let us not forget that a casino will not be subject to the same rules and regulations set forth by the mayor's office. This is a blatant attempt, albeit successful, for the city to use violence as a scapegoat for a ploy to invite a new casino. Wrong but clever

Why this, why now? This is a million dollar question but the answer is simply a million dollar one; "The City of Springfield, mainly the mayor's office, is putting itself in the best possible position to win the bid for the Western Massachusetts casino project." The whole story about curbing the violence is all a smoke screen because regardless of whether a bar closes at one or two the patrons will still remain the same. Let us not forget that a casino will not be subject to the same rules and regulations set forth by the mayor's office. This is a blatant attempt, albeit successful, for the city to use violence as a scapegoat for a ploy to invite a new casino. Wrong but clever

The issue that we have on our hands comes down to whether a police officer who rant racist epithets has the ability to do his or her job properly. The problem then becomes one of trust. Lets imagine an officer who posted comments about being a Nazi and then he is assigned to a detail at a Synagogue. Is he the best person for that job? The answer is NO. Police officers have to be held to a higher standard than John Q. Citizen because he has an inherent duty to protect Mr. Citizen regardless of his religion.

Legally the police officer is protected under free speech but this protection does not automatically protect them from punishment. Punishment comes from the employers who have the ability to then go as far as fire someone who uses such poor judgement.

Lets now vacate the cop for a second and imagine a custodian that mops the floor in a nursing home who post on his Facebook account his hate for the elderly. Free speech protects him but I would have no problem with my (or your) mother's nursing firing him. I hope that this example gives you a glimpse into the the problem with the insensitive posting.

This article makes me, a fervent free speech supporter, second guess my stance on the the First Amendment. Free Speech is a fundamental right that should extend to all but should its long reach extend the racist comments of those who have sworn to protect and serve. Are police officers permitted to voice their opinions without fear of public scrutiny? The answer is no. We hold our police to a higher standard as we should. This turns from a free speech discussion to a one of ethics. The ethical punishments for a cop who is bold enough to post racist comments shall be stiff because of their higher standings as law enforcement officials.

This story seems to be one that has been dipped in a subjective gloss and spewed onto this website for the readers to comment as if there are no supporters for Mr. Swan's position. As the head of the local chapter of the NAACP Mr. Swan has a certain obligation to call for the action of the police when there is evidence of an injustice in the community. A true miscarriage of justice would come without an appeal from the NAACP. This article highlights 5 or so comments/reactions to Mr. Swan's request for a probe but of the 5 Mr. Berry neglected to mention one that condoned the actions of Mr. Swan. This story is laced with subjectivity that only inflames an already hostile reading community. If we shall write about what people's reactions were then why not give both sides of the reactions. I will be up early on my day off to hear Mr. Swans radio show to hear the NAACP's reasoning for suggesting a probe.

I think the question is, what if this were a white kid that was killed by a black cop? Would there be a question into an investigation? The clear answer is no, there would be an investigation without any hesitation. All Mr. Swan asks is that the investigation be independent and is that too much to ask for. Absolutely not and oh yea by the way the NAACP was formed for these types of inquiries so lets not forget that many young black men have been shot by cops for unnecessary reason. Need I mention Oscar Grant? Come on people where would we be as a nation if there weren't people like Mr. Swan to ask the hard questions or what shall we do trust the always trustworthy police.

Mr. Berry has clearly stated his position on opinion based comments and showed his favor for the facts. Your claim that the bar's patrons were predominately African American has no factual basis. Should we take your word for it? Or shall we stick to the facts, I choose the latter. Moreover, the ethnicity of the patrons of a bar where a tragedy has happened is fodder for racist buffs and adds nothing more to a case like this than insinuations. So I guess what I'm trying to say is that Mr. Berry has given you his phone number so that you can call him and let him decide what is a fact and more importantly a fact worth publishing.

My question to Mr. Costantini is, "How do you look at you neighbors on Brookhaven St tomorrow or monday as they look unsure whether to waive or not." The shame that these sort of articles bring to a defendant is unimaginable and shall serve as a warning to all potential drug buyers. The underlying message in this article is; that if you want to leave your suburban home and come to Springfield to buy your drugs then you run the risk of being exposed. This exposure is not limited to your picture and address. Shame on you Mr. Costantini kudoos to George Graham for putting this offender on full display.

IS CARL CRAWFORD THE RED SOX' NEW J.D. DREW??
This question popped into my mind while watching the Red Sox v. Yankees today and witnessing firsthand the obvious plight of the right-fielder. Considering the positions played by both these players, Crawford in left and Drew in right, their only difference is their position in the outfield. The similarities between these two player are eerie when viewed under a microscope.
...